[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8472-8473]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1530
       FEDERAL JUDICIARY ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2010

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (S. 1782) to provide improvements for the operations of 
the Federal courts, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1782

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Judiciary 
     Administrative Improvements Act of 2010''.

     SEC. 2. SENIOR JUDGE GOVERNANCE CORRECTION.

       Section 631(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
     in the first sentence by striking ``(including any judge in 
     regular active service and any judge who has retired from 
     regular active service under section 371(b) of this title, 
     when designated and assigned to the court to which such judge 
     was appointed)''.

     SEC. 3. REVISION OF STATUTORY DESCRIPTION OF THE DISTRICT OF 
                   NORTH DAKOTA.

       Chapter 5 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking section 114 and inserting the following:

     ``Sec. 114. North Dakota

       ``North Dakota constitutes one judicial district.
       ``Court shall be held at Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, and 
     Minot.''.

     SEC. 4. SEPARATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS 
                   FORMS.

       Section 3553(c)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``the written order of judgment and 
     commitment'' and inserting ``a statement of reasons form 
     issued under section 994(w)(1)(B) of title 28''.

     SEC. 5. PRETRIAL SERVICES FUNCTIONS FOR JUVENILES.

       Section 3154 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (14) as paragraph (15); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (13) the following:
       ``(14) Perform, in a manner appropriate for juveniles, any 
     of the functions identified in this section with respect to 
     juveniles awaiting adjudication, trial, or disposition under 
     chapter 403 of this title who are not detained.''.

     SEC. 6. STATISTICAL REPORTING SCHEDULE FOR CRIMINAL WIRETAP 
                   ORDERS.

       Section 2519 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Within thirty days 
     after the expiration of an order (or each extension thereof) 
     entered under section 2518, or the denial of an order 
     approving an interception, the issuing or denying judge'' and 
     inserting ``In January of each year, any judge who has issued 
     an order (or an extension thereof) under section 2518 that 
     expired during the preceding year, or who has denied approval 
     of an interception during that year,'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``In January of each 
     year'' and inserting ``In March of each year''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``In April of each year'' 
     and inserting ``In June of each year''.

     SEC. 7. THRESHOLDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF OTHER THAN 
                   COUNSEL CASE COMPENSATION.

       Section 3006A of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), in the second sentence, by 
     striking ``$500'' and inserting ``$800''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$500'' and 
     inserting ``$800''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3), in the first sentence, by striking 
     ``$1,600'' and inserting ``$2,400''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) The dollar amounts provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) 
     shall be adjusted simultaneously by an amount, rounded to the 
     nearest multiple of $100, equal to the percentage of the 
     cumulative adjustments taking effect under section 5303 of 
     title 5 in the rates of pay under the General Schedule since 
     the date the dollar amounts provided in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), respectively, were last enacted or adjusted by 
     statute.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Johnson) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Federal Judiciary Administrative Improvements Act of 
2010 makes a number of changes to increase the efficiency and 
effectiveness of the Federal courts. The House passed a substantially 
similar version of this legislation last October.
  H.R. 3632, which I introduced, was cosponsored by Chairman John 
Conyers, Ranking Member Lamar Smith, and Ranking Member Howard Coble of 
the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy, which I also chair.
  S. 1782 would make a number of modest changes to the law and to the 
administrative operations of the Federal judiciary.
  First, it will fix a minor conflict in the law and make clear that 
senior judges with a reduced workload are permitted to participate in 
the selection of magistrate judges.
  Second, the bill incorporates a proposal supported by my friend and 
colleague from North Dakota, Earl Pomeroy, to place North Dakota in a 
single judicial district. This will allow for a more even distribution 
of the workloads of the Federal courts in North Dakota.
  Third, the bill makes some minor adjustments for criminal matters. It 
requires separating the Statement of Reason from other information 
relating to the case, enabling confidential information to be more 
carefully controlled and protected.
  The bill also clarifies the scope and authority of Federal Pretrial 
Service officers to supervise and assist juveniles awaiting delinquency 
disposition in Federal court as an alternative to incarceration.
  Further, the bill adjusts the deadline for both State and Federal 
judges to file their wiretap totals with the Administrative Office of 
the Courts so that the annual wiretap report to Congress is accurate 
and does not later require a later addendum.
  Finally, the bill increases the statutory amount that can be paid for 
experts without requiring approval by the chief judge. This raises the 
current threshold to accurately reflect the impact of inflation.
  While I strongly support passage of the Senate bill, I note that some 
provisions in the House bill are not included in this bill.
  For example, the House bill would have adjusted the disability 
requirement and cost-of-living annuities of four territorial judges, 
thereby reducing existing inequities between them and other term judges 
such as magistrate and bankruptcy judges.
  The House bill would have changed the annual lead limit for the 
judicial branch and adjusted the pay scale.
  Finally, the House bill would have allowed four Federal Judicial 
Center Division directors to receive a salary commensurate with their 
responsibilities and on par with similar AO personnel.
  I intend to introduce new legislation that will include these 
provisions from my version of the Federal Judiciary Administrative 
Improvements Act, but let me be clear that passage of the legislation 
before us today is an important step to improving our Federal judiciary 
and helping it function in the most efficient way. This legislation is 
bipartisan and noncontroversial. It passed the Senate under unanimous 
consent and has the full backing of the Judicial Conference. I ask my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the purpose of S. 1782 is to implement noncontroversial 
administrative provisions that the Judicial Conference and the House 
Judiciary Committee believe are necessary to improve the operations of 
the Federal judiciary and provide justice for the American people. The 
bill retains most of the content of H.R. 3632, which we passed in 
October of 2009.
  The Judicial Conference is the policymaking body of the Federal 
judiciary and through its committee system

[[Page 8473]]

evaluates court operations. The conference endorses all the provisions 
in this bill.
  S. 1782 affects a wide range of judicial branch programs and 
operations, including those pertaining to financial administration, 
process improvements, and personnel administration. The bill 
incorporates five separate items.
  First, it clarifies that senior judges must satisfy minimum work 
thresholds to participate in court government matters, including the 
selection of magistrates.
  Second, the bill eliminates the references to divisions and counties 
in the statutory description of the Judicial District of North Dakota, 
which enables the court to better distribute the workload between two 
active district judges and reduce travel for litigants in the northern 
central area of the district.
  Third, it authorizes the Statement of Reasons that judges must issue 
upon sentencing to be filed separately with the court. Current law 
requires that the statement be bundled with other information in the 
case distributed to the Sentencing Commission, where it can be 
difficult to maintain a seal related to confidential information.
  Fourth, it specifies that the Federal Pretrial Service officers can 
provide the same services to juveniles as they do for adult offenders, 
such as drug treatment.
  And, finally, it applies an inflationary index to the threshold 
amount requiring approval by the chief judge of reimbursements for the 
cost of hiring expert witnesses and conducting investigation for 
indigent defendants.
  The dollar thresholds are statutorily fixed and erode over time. This 
means chief justices must devote greater time approving what are 
otherwise not genuine high-dollar requests.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 1782 is necessary to improve the functioning of the 
U.S. courts, which will ultimately benefit the American people. This is 
a noncontroversial bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, S. 1782.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________